ReviewHerz2009
[Acute thoracic pain: Chest Pain Unit - the certification campaign of the German Society of Cardiology].
Review in Herz, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Criteria of the German Society of Cardiology for the establishment of chest pain units: update 2014.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2015Guideline
- Trial
- Article
- Unexpected high level of severe events even in low-risk profile chest pain unit patients.Herz · 2022Observational
- Review
- Review
- Article
- Self-referral to chest pain units: results of the German CPU-registry.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2012Article
- Pre- and early in-hospital procedures in patients with acute coronary syndromes: first results of the "German chest pain unit registry".Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Chest Pain Unit (CPU) Task Force of the German Society of Cardiology inaugurated elaborated prerequisites for a CPU certification program to evaluate CPUs across the country. For this reason, a consensus document including criteria for CPUs was developed and published in October 2008. Aim of this effort is to ensure a network of elaborated centers which meet or exceed quality-of-care measures in order to improve the standard of care of patients with acute thoracic pain. After application and a formal checkup of the institution, the minimum requirements are assessed by an expert committee of the German Society of Cardiology according to presubmitted documentation of the care processes for patients with acute thoracic pain. Components of certification include characteristic locations, equipment, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, cooperations, staff education, and organization. Certification specifically implies algorithms for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stable angina, hypertensive crisis, acute pulmonary embolism, acute aortic syndrome, cardiogenic shock, and resuscitation. Availability of a catheter laboratory ready within the facility is mandatory. The CPU and the cath lab are obliged to be available 24 h per day over 365 days per year. After successful documentation review, a certification audit team reviews the facility's application, infrastructure, patient care, and each of the requirements according to the consensus document on site and makes recommendations to the expert committee. Certification is finally awarded by the expert committee of the German Society of Cardiology to those CPUs which fulfill the dedicated requirements and successfully run through the complete certification process. Within this process, CPUs can plan and organize the delivery of care in a systematic manner, and the differentiation between minimum requirements and best practice allows further developments and innovations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19444406What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.